The Librarian wrote:And you seem to be brain dead in the matter of what teachers are allowed to do and not to. Misusing their position as a teacher to bully students and give back on innocent people for an old school grudge would go under the "you are fired and risk prison for what you have done" But luckily for him, Dumbledore had some use out of him.

My, my, my, what a myopic viewpoint you have. You seem to think that every place of learning in the world, including the magical one, operates under the standards that you put forth. Sorry to rain on your parade but your way of thinking on what teachers are and are not allowed to do is relatively new and for the most part only pertains to the west. If you hadn't noticed the magical world operates very differently than the western muggle world, and as such what a teacher is and is not allowed to do may and IS very different than what you may have experienced during your time in the classroom.

Maybe you should try opening your mind to the FACT that where these children attend school operates very differently than what you may be used to. And upon realizing that fact you'll stop being so hypocritical and stop bullying anyone who may have anything favorable to say about Snape. (Not that I disagree with everything you say, but the way you say it shows you have serious unresolved Snape issues.)

^You have no idea.

Most people's greatest accomplishment will be dying and releasing their molecules back into nature rather than holding them captive in a cesspool of genetics that only produces stupidity.

Thane Blackthorn wrote:My, my, my, what a myopic viewpoint you have. You seem to think that every place of learning in the world, including the magical one, operates under the standards that you put forth. Sorry to rain on your parade but your way of thinking on what teachers are and are not allowed to do is relatively new and for the most part only pertains to the west. If you hadn't noticed the magical world operates very differently than the western muggle world, and as such what a teacher is and is not allowed to do may and IS very different than what you may have experienced during your time in the classroom.

The fact that Dumbledore, McGonagall and the other teachers take action against every thing that harm or hurt the students in any way points to that there are rules safe guarding the students from mistreating.The rules might not be as modern as our, but they are there. Umbrige and every one else who did some thing had to do it in the dark outside of the view from the authority. There are rules in Hogwarts and Snape are overstepping them.

Not a fact, but I honestly don''t think that J.K would create a school where teachers are allowed to mistreat and bully the students. Not when children all over the world is reading. Or what do you think?

Thane Blackthorn wrote:Maybe you should try opening your mind to the FACT that where these children attend school operates very differently than what you may be used to. And upon realizing that fact you'll stop being so hypocritical and stop bullying anyone who may have anything favorable to say about Snape. (Not that I disagree with everything you say, but the way you say it shows you have serious unresolved Snape issues.)

This is really starting to bite back at me D: I don't bite on people saying good things about Snape. I like Snape. He is my favorite character(not person) in the HP series. What I don't like is bull$hit. People going around with their own versions of him believing that one to be correct. Or making stupid and thoughtless excuses.

Honestly! How can a person make the excuse that it is ok to bully an eleven year old innocent child based on what another person did in another life time. Morals and common sense should kick in by here...

And I don't have issues with Snape. I like the man. Being granted I do how ever have some big problems with some of his die hard fans <__<

I ship canon because I have actually read the books and seen what they feel and whom they love.

ynniG wrote:Sirius. Tough decision here. Snape turned out to be a very interesting character in the last book. What surprised me is that Harry names a child after Snape and not one after his godfather, Sirius. Perhaps Harry's next child would be named Sirius.

Harry's opinion on Snape definitely changed by the end of the last book and it's quite hard where Harry's loyalty lies if both were alive. Harry loves his godfather but doesn't consider Snape his enemy while Snape and Sirius would still have some hatred towards each other. Snape didn't really care about Harry but did just enough to keep him from harm. I have the utmost respect for Snape but if I had to pick a guy to side with, it would be Sirius.

This is a seriously tough question. Are we talking over-all or specific to something? Such as, how they interact with Harry, how they behaved when they were at school etc....?

I voted Snape, mainly because of how he was treated by Sirius and James at school. They were the 'cool kids' picking on the underdogs. Sirius and James are such conceited jerks at school. Yet, Snape does go on to become a death eater... Its a tough call.

In the end both died to protect Harry. However, i think Snape risked more.

Avis Oppugno wrote:This is a seriously tough question. Are we talking over-all or specific to something? Such as, how they interact with Harry, how they behaved when they were at school etc....?

Over all. There whole life and all their actions.

Avis Oppugno wrote:I voted Snape, mainly because of how he was treated by Sirius and James at school. They were the 'cool kids' picking on the underdogs. Sirius and James are such conceited jerks at school.

Yes, but they grew up from it. Snape how ever bully innocent students while abusing his position as a teacher.

Moral should have kicked in here for you.....

Avis Oppugno wrote:Yet, Snape does go on to become a death eater... Its a tough call.

A deatheeater: Kills, tortures, abuses, murder, spread hatred, going after a specific group of people. They are like the Nazis.

And comparing a teen bully with real Nazis is indeed a "though call."Dear lord. Moral is overrated here <___<

Avis Oppugno wrote:In the end both died to protect Harry. However, i think Snape risked more. I guess its a draw...

Greta, 8:If Snape didn't love Lily, would he have still tried to protect Harry?

JKR:No. He Definitely wouldn't have done. He wouldn't have been remotely interested in what happened to this boy.

I ship canon because I have actually read the books and seen what they feel and whom they love.

Sirius. Nobody wants to choose him after the seventh book and this totally wrong movie version Snape. But I stick to my man. I like that both of them were very brave men,but they're also flawed... They have a similar family situation... But,in my opinion,Sirius was a better person. Yes,he was a bully when he was a teenager (that IS horrible,but it's better than to be a bully as an adult),yes he was arrogant,BUT he fought for the good cause,and his animagus form is a dog. Animagi can only take on the form of one specific animal. This animal form is not chosen by the wizard, but determined by their personality and inner traits. Thus, one's Animagus form is a reflection of one's inner nature. The dog is the emblem of faithfulness and guardianship. Dogs are considered loyal and temperate, and are symbols of courage, vigilancy and loyal fidelity.
I do like Snape,too. But Padfoot is my favourite.

"It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities."

I've never liked Sirius, particularly after reading about the little "joke" he played on Snape when they were in school. Sirius was just a jerk, and frankly, I don't blame Severus for joining the Death Eaters. Sirius' arrogance is just too much for me to be able to take. I can't stand him.

Snape's bullying of students is deplorable, petty and inexcusable. However, it seems clear that Snape is a character that has been psychologically damaged by his past.

James, on the other hand, bullied Snape because he was different and because they held more power than him. It is very easy to 'outgrow' bad behaviour when it stems simply from your own arrogance and whim; this is more difficult when you are embittered and damaged from years of neglect, rejection and bullying.

Another reason why some readers are more willing to forgive Snape's bullying behaviour than that of Sirius and James is because J.K.R. takes the opposite approach. James and Sirius are shown to bully Snape, not as a retaliatory act, but for the sheer 'fun' of it. Yet, they are rarely condemned or reproached for their cruel behaviour. The majority of Hogwarts staff and pupils praise them for their positive attributes and simply ignore their quite considerable flaws. Even J.K.R. does this, to a certain extent, by asserting that they 'grew into better people', without making them apologise or even demonstrate any real remorse for the harm they caused. In short, they are given a 'get out a jail for free' card, where other characters (including Harry) are made to face up to their mistakes. Conversely, the other characters are well aware of, and open about, Snape's many flaws.

Somehow, bullying hurts more when it is done by a 'popular' person and when other (generally decent) people choose to overlook their bad behaviour. It is easier to shrug off the effects of bullying when most other decent people will at least condemn the behaviour of the bully.

*

Greta, 8: If Snape didn't love Lily, would he have still tried to protect Harry?

JKR: No. He Definitely wouldn't have done. He wouldn't have been remotely interested in what happened to this boy.

Snape was a cold and selfish b__________ at this stage of his life. Snape only agreed to protect Harry, at this point, because he was the son of Lily. However, having taken this step, Snape begins a journey. At the end of this journey, Snape is a different and more moral character than the man he was at the beginning. Snape learns that all human life is valuable and that he should try to protect others simply because it is the right thing to do.

Would Snape have reached this realisation, had he not loved Lily? I suspect not.

Does this mean that Snape never learned to value the lives of other innocent people? Not necessarily.

'The Librarian' wrote:

A deatheeater: Kills, tortures, abuses, murder, spread hatred, going after a specific group of people. They are like the Nazis.

And comparing a teen bully with real Nazis is indeed a "though call."Dear lord. Moral is overrated here <___<

We never learn the full extent of Snape's work as a Death Eater. However, we do know that the former Death Eater, Regulus Black, was genuinely appalled when he discovered the truth about the cause he had previously supported.

Regulus joined the Death Eaters because he believed that pure blood wizards were 'superior' to other wizards and Muggles and that they should assert their 'rightful' position as world leaders. Yet, he did not believe that these people should be tortured or murdered and he even willingly gave his life in an attempt to protect them (i.e. by helping to destroy L.V.)

I don't condone Regulus's early views (or similar real life perceptions) but I respect that he learned from his mistakes. Moreover, his enormous courage and selflessness cements his position as a true hero in the series.

I don't doubt that Snape's involvement with the Death Eaters was greater than that of Regulus. Similarly, Regulus's loyalty to Voldemort ended the moment he (Regulus) learned the truth, whereas Snape only left Voldemort because he threatened Lily. Yet, it is possible that Snape somehow managed to avoid the more nefarious tasks that were willingly performed by other Death Eaters. This doesn't excuse his association with such a despicable movement, but it does seem likely that Snape was never capable of the torture and cold blooded murder that was practiced (and even enjoyed) by L.V. and most of his supporters.

Last edited by Samovila on April 17th, 2012, 2:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I think they're just as bad as each other when it comes to bullying people.

Sirius bullied people because he was extremely unahppy at home, and it helped him to maintain his image at Hogwarts - for a time, at least. He didn't really grow out of trying to bully Snape, but the effect was lessened in their adult years.

Snape obviously had a pretty rought childhood and teenage years, but he was beyond vile to countless students throughout his entire teaching career. Sure, deep down he wasn't a horrible person, but in the daily lives of the students whose lives he made hell that just wasn't good enough.

I think Snape was worse because at the end of the day, he was a Dark wizard during his life through choice. Sirius could have so easily gone down that route, but refused.

Snape's bullying of students is deplorable, petty and inexcusable. However, it seems clear that Snape is a character that has been psychologically damaged by his past.

Psychological damaged? That could indeed be a part of Snape.Doesn't make him any more likable tho.

Samovila wrote:James, on the other hand, bullied Snape because he was different and because they held more power than him. It is very easy to 'outgrow' bad behaviour when it stems simply from your own arrogance and whim; this is more difficult when you are embittered and damaged from years of neglect, rejection and bullying.

Err... You do relize that this is the topic about Snape and Sirius. Not James.

And what can be said about Snape's childhood can also be said about Sirius. It simply seems that Sirius was the better man and fought for what was right instead of giving in.

Samovila wrote:Another reason why some readers are more willing to forgive Snape's bullying behaviour than that of Sirius and James is because J.K.R. takes the opposite approach. James and Sirius are shown to bully Snape, not as a retaliatory act, but for the sheer 'fun' of it. Yet, they are rarely condemned or reproached for their cruel behaviour. The majority of Hogwarts staff and pupils praise them for their positive attributes and simply ignore their quite considerable flaws. Even J.K.R. does this, to a certain extent, by asserting that they 'grew into better people', without making them apologise or even demonstrate any real remorse for the harm they caused. In short, they are given a 'get out a jail for free' card, where other characters (including Harry) are made to face up to their mistakes. Conversely, the other characters are well aware of, and open about, Snape's many flaws.

There is a huge flaw in this. The first Snape fans liked him for what he was. They found him interesting and funny to read about. Before we saw the seventh book. They like that he was mean, bullied people and all that. And they thought that was every thing to it. Some people are simply mean. And at this point he did not have many fans at all.

The reason so many damned fangirls are willing to forgive him is because the read a little part in the seventh book called "the prince's tale" and immediately forgot every thing bad about him or ignores it out of pity.

Same thing happened with Jacob Black in Twilight.A man loving a woman he will never get and gets his heart broken by it has proven to swarm a character fangirls......

Samovila wrote:Somehow, bullying hurts more when it is done by a 'popular' person

I don't agree. A teacher is a role model for the students to learn from and feel safe with. For a young child to be bullied by a much older person with power in that place don't give the child much place to feel safe or stand up for his or her rights. And the friends? Same age with same fear and just as little power. That is much worse.

Samovila wrote:and when other (generally decent) people choose to overlook their bad behaviour. It is easier to shrug off the effects of bullying when most other decent people will at least condemn the behaviour of the bully.

No decent people at Hogwarts would stand up for a death eater. Or those who strove to be one. They feared them and kept their distances.

Samovila wrote:Snape was a cold and selfish b__________ at this stage of his life.

That stage of life? That was who he was the whole life.

That interview came after the last book and focused on Snape in that time close to the end and his character as whole.

Samovila wrote:Snape only agreed to protect Harry, at this point, because he was the son of Lily. However, having taken this step, Snape begins a journey. At the end of this journey, Snape is a different and more moral character than the man he was at the beginning. Snape learns that all human life is valuable and that he should try to protect others simply because it is the right thing to do.

He became less selfish, mean, horrible, coldhearted, grease and a git.But mind you he was still was all of those things. He went down from worse to bad. But he was never on neutral or good.

Samovila wrote:Would Snape have reached this realisation, had he not loved Lily? I suspect not.

What realization? That he has only ever cared for what he wants accept when Lily had to give her life for Harry?

Samovila wrote:Does this mean that Snape never learned to value the lives of other innocent people? Not necessarily.

Most certainly not. They did not lie in his interests and nor would he gain anything he wanted from caring.

Samovila wrote:We never learn the full extent of Snape's work as a Death Eater. However, we do know that the former Death Eater, Regulus Black, was genuinely appalled when he discovered the truth about the cause he had previously supported.

Yes. Regulus who isn't Snape was appalled and tried to leave.Snape how ever stayed and continued as an active death eater. Until years later when he him self would lose something he wanted if he stayed.

Samovila wrote:Regulus joined the Death Eaters because he believed that pure blood wizards were 'superior' to other wizards and Muggles and that they should assert their 'rightful' position as world leaders. Yet, he did not believe that these people should be tortured or murdered and he even willingly gave his life in an attempt to protect them (i.e. by helping to destroy L.V.)

Which is a reason to why so many people like Regulus. Including me.In the end he did the right thing because it was the right thing to do.

Samovila wrote:I don't condone Regulus's early views (or similar real life perceptions) but I respect that he learned from his mistakes. Moreover, his enormous courage and selflessness cements his position as a true hero in the series.

Agreed.

I don't doubt that Snape's involvement with the Death Eaters was greater than that of Regulus. Similarly, Regulus's loyalty to Voldemort ended the moment he (Regulus) learned the truth, whereas Snape only left Voldemort because he threatened Lily.[/quote]And that is the difference. Regulus showed his heart and moral by doing what was right.

Snape? His own personal gain of what he wanted.

Samovila wrote:Yet, it is possible that Snape somehow managed to avoid the more nefarious tasks that were willingly performed by other Death Eaters.

Why would he do that? He didn't like muggle borns save for Lily. He loved dark arts and created his own spells. And he wanted to be some one. To prove him self. Snape would certainly not be the one who served cookies and milk on the meetings.

And there is this quote:

â€œDonâ€™t be shocked, Severus. How many men and women have you watched die?â€â€œLately, only those whom I could not save,â€ said Snape.

Snape has been on the front lines and raid with his fellow death eaters.And it was only this close to the end when Snape could care about those when he him self had been involved some how.

Samovila wrote:This doesn't excuse his association with such a despicable movement, but it does seem likely that Snape was never capable of the torture and cold blooded murder that was practiced (and even enjoyed) by L.V. and most of his supporters.

Look at previous answers. The facts suggest other than your guess.

I ship canon because I have actually read the books and seen what they feel and whom they love.

James, on the other hand, bullied Snape because he was different and because they held more power than him. It is very easy to 'outgrow' bad behaviour when it stems simply from your own arrogance and whim; this is more difficult when you are embittered and damaged from years of neglect, rejection and bullying.

The Librarian wrote:

Err... You do realize that this is the topic about Snape and Sirius. Not James.

I originally wrote this about James and Sirius, but I'd forgotten that Sirius had a terrible home life too (hence the edit.)

The Librarian wrote:

And what can be said about Snape's childhood can also be said about Sirius. It simply seems that Sirius was the better man and fought for what was right instead of giving in.

I agree that there's some truth in this: it took a lot of courage for Sirius to defy his family's political views. However, Sirius was able to escape his family, during term time, and enjoyed being popular and powerful at school, whereas Snape was bullied and rejected both at home and at school. Apart from Lily, the 'Voldemort Youth' were the only people to treat Snape with any respect.

I wrote:

Another reason why some readers are more willing to forgive Snape's bullying behaviour than that of Sirius and James is because J.K.R. takes the opposite approach. James and Sirius are shown to bully Snape, not as a retaliatory act, but for the sheer 'fun' of it. Yet, they are rarely condemned or reproached for their cruel behaviour. The majority of Hogwarts staff and pupils praise them for their positive attributes and simply ignore their quite considerable flaws. Even J.K.R. does this, to a certain extent, by asserting that they 'grew into better people', without making them apologise or even demonstrate any real remorse for the harm they caused. In short, they are given a 'get out a jail for free' card, where other characters (including Harry) are made to face up to their mistakes. Conversely, the other characters are well aware of, and open about, Snape's many flaws.

The Librarian wrote:

There is a huge flaw in this. The first Snape fans liked him for what he was. They found him interesting and funny to read about. Before we saw the seventh book. They like that he was mean, bullied people and all that. And they thought that was every thing to it. Some people are simply mean. And at this point he did not have many fans at all.

As a character, Snape is funny and interesting to read about. I love Snape as a fictional character, but I know I wouldn't like him as a real life person. However, I would still feel some sympathy for him and some respect for the fact that he devoted the rest of his life to trying to make reparation for his sins. The point is, the reader learned that there was a much better and more humane side to Snape's character, in DH; this was bound to change their earlier assessment of him. Similarly, my views of Sirius and James changed when I saw them bullying another student, for the pure 'fun' of it, without showing any real remorse for their actions.

I just think that JKR was too ready to forgive James and Sirius and too keen to persuade the reader that their flaws were relatively insignificant. On the other hand, she clearly sees Snape as being essentially a b_____, with a bit of good in him.

The Librarian wrote:

A teacher is a role model for the students to learn from and feel safe with. For a young child to be bullied by a much older person with power in that place don't give the child much place to feel safe or stand up for his or her rights. And the friends? Same age with same fear and just as little power. That is much worse.

I agree that it is worse for an adult to be a bully than a child or an adolescent. However, it annoys me that James and Sirius are so wonderful that they should be automatically forgiven (by the reader and other characters) without being made to account or apologise for their actions. They were old enough to know that bullying was wrong and that other people, who looked up to them, would follow suit.

Snape, on the other hand, was hated by most of the students, who would support each other against his bullying. For instance, most people (rightly) condemned Snape for bullying Harry and Neville, and disliked him for this same reason.

Conversely, most people liked James and Sirius and never made them account for their cruel and damaging treatment of Snape. Bullying is more damaging when (a) it comes from all sides and (b) it is condoned or ignored by most of the people around. It was almost as though most people were saying that Snape deserved to be bullied, because he wasn't cool and popular. Only the minority of people (who were disliked by most of the decent people at Hogwarts) thought it was ok to bully Neville; the rest liked and defended him.

I haven't actually voted for either Snape or Sirius because I think neither shows enough remorse for bullying vulnerable people .

Samovila wrote:I originally wrote this about James and Sirius, but I'd forgotten that Sirius had a terrible home life too (hence the edit.)

I see ^^

Samovila wrote:I agree that there's some truth in this: it took a lot of courage for Sirius to defy his family's political views. However, Sirius was able to escape his family, during term time, and enjoyed being popular and powerful at school, whereas Snape was bullied and rejected both at home and at school. Apart from Lily, the 'Voldemort Youth' were the only people to treat Snape with any respect.

But Snape was not forced to walk down the dark road he chose. And wanted Lily with him. Snape wanted to be in Slytherin and he had his views. What other students would want to help and protect one that support Voldemort and his view unless you your self share those views?

I'll have to admit that I would not come to the aid to a nazi if he had been in my school. If he chose that path and hurt people by it, one had to fact the consequences of it.

Samovila wrote:As a character, Snape is funny and interesting to read about. I love Snape as a fictional character, but I know I wouldn't like him as a real life person.

Agreed.

Samovila wrote:However, I would still feel some sympathy for him and some respect for the fact that he devoted the rest of his life to trying to make reparation for his sins.

Sympathy and respect yes. But not what most other fangirls goes on about.

Samovila wrote:The point is, the reader learned that there was a much better and more humane side to Snape's character, in DH; this was bound to change their earlier assessment of him.

This is all true. But most fangirls do not see it. They only see the Princes tale and from there on let their emotions rule.

Samovila wrote:Similarly, my views of Sirius and James changed when I saw them bullying another student, for the pure 'fun' of it, without showing any real remorse for their actions.

If one wants to forgive Snape for the actions of a life time due to his loyalty to Dumbeldore and effort against Voldemort, it should be the same for Sirius and James. They too gave their life against Voldemort and his minions. And they never stood on Voldemorts side at all.

Samovila wrote:I just think that JKR was too ready to forgive James and Sirius and too keen to persuade the reader that their flaws were relatively insignificant. On the other hand, she clearly sees Snape as being essentially a b_____, with a bit of good in him.

James, Sirius and Remus all gave their life to fight Voldemort. They where in the order, stood on the front lines and fought for what was right.If that isn't a reason to forgive them for mistakes as children we should by right never even think of forgiving Snape.

Samovila wrote:I agree that it is worse for an adult to be a bully than a child or an adolescent. However, it annoys me that James and Sirius are so wonderful that they should be automatically forgiven (by the reader and other characters) without being made to account or apologise for their actions. They were old enough to know that bullying was wrong and that other people, who looked up to them, would follow suit.

We hear praises of James after he died and praises for Sirius after he was cleared and died. What they did and fought for earned them the prasies.Mistakes as children should not throw them and what they did against Voldemort into the mud. And exactly the same thing is it with Snape.Snape got his praise to after his death and had proven his loyalty and gave his life for the cause. But this did not happened to Snape until the last book. James and Lily died before the first book and Sirius in the fifth. They simply had more time to be praised. And we see it from Harry's point of view. Would McGnagall or Dumbledore go around saying that Harry's father was an idiot as child and ignore what James did for his son, wife, friends and the order?

There is a reason to why James company was shown in a good light. And rightfully so.

But still I'm not so sure if Snape ever fully earned forgiveness for every thing he did.

Samovila wrote:Snape, on the other hand, was hated by most of the students, who would support each other against his bullying. For instance, most people (rightly) condemned Snape for bullying Harry and Neville, and disliked him for this same reason.

Students to start in a school at the age of eleven deciding that they should hate a teacher. Snape earned the hatred against him due to his actions.

Samovila wrote:Conversely, most people liked James and Sirius and never made them account for their cruel and damaging treatment of Snape.

The teacher always had them punished when they got caught. They did not approve nor protected James and Sirius. It was idiocy in school but they grew up from it and became men who gave their life for what was right. So when Harry hear about them when he comes to Hogwarts he learn who they where as his parents and friends. Good people who died for him and for what was right. That should not be shunned over child idiocy that also sadly is common.

And that could not happen for Snape since he continued to be horrible, mistreating people and being coldhearted. You earn peoples affection by being good. Not by being a horrible git.

Samovila wrote:Bullying is more damaging when (a) it comes from all sides and (b) it is condoned or ignored by most of the people around.

Who would come to the aid for a wanna be deatheater? The muggle borns? Those who are against Voldemort? Those who want nothing to do with the war? Those who are afraid? Or those who also are a wanna be deatheater?

Snape was in a lonely position when it comes to all other students. And that was because his own choices of what road he took. A spiteful hater who goes after a minority of the people has few friends.

Samovila wrote:It was almost as though most people were saying that Snape deserved to be bullied, because he wasn't cool and popular.

Just as Snape and the rest of his kind would think that pure bloods was superior to every one and that the muggles and muggle borns should bend their knees to them?

This was not only about how Snape looked. Actions have consequences my friend

Samovila wrote:Only the minority of people (who were disliked by most of the decent people at Hogwarts) thought it was ok to bully Neville; the rest liked and defended him.

Good and kind people defend those who are kind and good.

Where would Snape fit into that?

I ship canon because I have actually read the books and seen what they feel and whom they love.

I agree that Sirius and James did a lot of good and I'm not suggesting that their actions are less forgivable than those of Snape.

All three characters did some very good things and some very bad things. They have all bullied people, without provocation, and it seems that none of them felt particularly sorry about this.

The difference is, JKR and most of the 'good' characters from the book never really take James or Sirius to task for this (Harry and Lily are the only exceptions.) Their behaviour goes unpunished and they are presented as â€˜wonderfulâ€™ people, despite their lack of apologies or remorse.

Snape, on the other hand, is 'punished' by the author and other characters for his flaws. Additionally, it is openly acknowledged throughout the series that he is a 'git' (as Ron would say .)

The Librarian wrote:

But Snape was not forced to walk down the dark road he chose. And wanted Lily with him. Snape wanted to be in Slytherin and he had his views. What other students would want to help and protect one that support Voldemort and his view unless you your self share those views?

Not all Slytherins shared these views and I suspect that Snape was initially drawn to Slytherin because his mum had been placed there. I think Snape became involved in the 'Voldemort Youth' because they admired and respected his intelligence and magical abilities. Also, they were one of the few groups who were willing to accept him.

I can understand this to a certain extent, but he did not have to follow them into the Death Eaters. I believe he did this because he craved power and status. Like Regulus, Snape might have had some sympathy with Voldemort's desire to bring wizards out of hiding, and into a position of power over the Muggle world. However, unlike Regulus, he did not leave the movement as soon as he realised what this actually involved.

The Librarian wrote:

I'll have to admit that I would not come to the aid to a nazi if he had been in my school. If he chose that path and hurt people by it, one had to fact the consequences of it.

From what we see in the book, James and Sirius bullied Snape simply because they didn't like him, rather than in retaliation for anything he had done to them. It seems that Snape only instigated trouble with James after his friendship with Lily had ended and James started dating the girl he loved.

Additionally, it would seem that James and Sirius bullied Snape from his first day of school. Snape wasn't a Death Eater at that point, and it wasn't until he reached his mid teens that he became particularly involved with the 'Voldemort Youth'. Also, Sirius's 'joke' could have easily resulted in Snape's death or in him contracting lycanthropy, and it was only because of James that this didn't happen. Sirius was mature and clever enough to know the potential consequences of his actions, yet he got away with deliberately endangering the safety of another student.

Snape might have had a fascination with Dark Arts, but this doesn't mean he was using them in school (I'm pretty sure that Lily would have broken off the friendship much earlier, had this been the case.) Even Slughorn and Ollivander have expressed some fascination with dark magic, in a purely 'academic' or theoretical capacity, but they never became Death Eaters or dark wizards. Had Snape been a Ravenclaw, this fascination might well have remained a theoretical interest.

Samovila wrote:I agree that Sirius and James did a lot of good and I'm not suggesting that their actions are less forgivable than those of Snape.

All three characters did some very good things and some very bad things. They have all bullied people, without provocation, and it seems that none of them felt particularly sorry about this.

But the thing is that I can't compare it. Bullying as a child can not ever be compared to what Snape did under a life time. Both as a child but also as a grown up man.

Samovila wrote:The difference is, JKR and most of the 'good' characters from the book never really take James or Sirius to task for this (Harry and Lily are the only exceptions.) Their behaviour goes unpunished and they are presented as â€˜wonderfulâ€™ people, despite their lack of apologies or remorse.

If that would have been true which it isn't Harry would not have seen James and Sirius names so many times when cleaning the records. As Snape wanted to spite the boy of the man he hated. James and Sirius didn't went unpunished. But their punishment stayed in school as their actions was when they where children and in school.

This could never be said about Snape.

Samovila wrote:Snape, on the other hand, is 'punished' by the author and other characters for his flaws. Additionally, it is openly acknowledged throughout the series that he is a 'git' (as Ron would say .)

Because of his flaws? o___0No. Snape gets punished due to his actions.And every action has a consequence.

Samovila wrote:Not all Slytherins shared these views and I suspect that Snape was initially drawn to Slytherin because his mum had been placed there.

No. Not all Slytherins shared Voldemorts views. So why should they defend those views and those who follows them?

Samovila wrote:I think Snape became involved in the 'Voldemort Youth' because they admired and respected his intelligence and magical abilities. Also, they were one of the few groups who were willing to accept him.

That would be one of the reasons Snape was allowed to join them.Sharing their views and cause was also required.

Samovila wrote:I can understand this to a certain extent, but he did not have to follow them into the Death Eaters. I believe he did this because he craved power and status.

So he he did what he did because of his own selfish carving for power and status? He didn't killed because he wanted, but since he wanted to prove him self? He didn't fight for Voldemort because he wanted Voldemort to win, but because he wanted power?

That is wishful thinking and just as bad any way.

Samovila wrote:From what we see in the book, James and Sirius bullied Snape simply because they didn't like him, rather than in retaliation for anything he had done to them. It seems that Snape only instigated trouble with James after his friendship with Lily had ended and James started dating the girl he loved.

Nope. Snape had his views and had his love for dark and dangerous magics. When Snape first joined Hogwarts he knew more about dark arts than most seventh years.

Samovila wrote:Additionally, it would seem that James and Sirius bullied Snape from his first day of school.

Nope. They simply started to dislike each others since the train.

Samovila wrote:Snape wasn't a Death Eater at that point, and it wasn't until he reached his mid teens that he became particularly involved with the 'Voldemort Youth'.

He didn't became a deatheater until after school. He befriended the other idiots much earlier than that.

Samovila wrote:Also, Sirius's 'joke' could have easily resulted in Snape's death or in him contracting lycanthropy, and it was only because of James that this didn't happen. Sirius was mature and clever enough to know the potential consequences of his actions, yet he got away with deliberately endangering the safety of another student.

This I can't and wont argue against as it is true. What Sirius did here was at best idiotic and foolish. It was wrong of him.

Samovila wrote:Snape might have had a fascination with Dark Arts, but this doesn't mean he was using them in school (I'm pretty sure that Lily would have broken off the friendship much earlier, had this been the case.)

Nope. As I said Snape knew more about the dark arts than most seventh years when he started at Hogwarts. He invented dark arts as a hobby. It was his view of having fun. And with Lily in Gryfindor only seeing the best in Snape could never know what Snape did.

Samovila wrote:Even Slughorn and Ollivander have expressed some fascination with dark magic, in a purely 'academic' or theoretical capacity, but they never became Death Eaters or dark wizards. Had Snape been a Ravenclaw, this fascination might well have remained a theoretical interest.

Yes. Some fascination that also involved defense against it.

I ship canon because I have actually read the books and seen what they feel and whom they love.

So he did what he did because of his own selfish carving for power and status? He didn't killed because he wanted, but since he wanted to prove himself? He didn't fight for Voldemort because he wanted Voldemort to win, but because he wanted power?

That is wishful thinking and just as bad any way.

I don't believe that Snape entirely shared Voldemort's views, regarding 'ethnic cleansing', and he may have privately felt some revulsion at the Death Eaters methods. However, this doesn't change the fact that Snape's actions, in supporting this heinous movement, were Machiavellian, opportunistic, deeply immoral and selfish. Snape evidently isn't a psychopath (like Voldemort, Bellatrix etc) but in some ways, he is less prinicipled because they at least believed in their evil cause.

I doubt that Snape was directly involved in the killing of innocent people, but he was prepared to put innocent lives at risk while he walked away and reaped the benefits of being a Death Eater.

I'm not justifying Snape's actions, but I do think he felt genuine remorse and strived to make reparation for his past actions.

I said:

The difference is, JKR and most of the 'good' characters from the book never really take James or Sirius to task for this (Harry and Lily are the only exceptions.) Their behaviour goes unpunished and they are presented as â€˜wonderfulâ€™ people, despite their lack of apologies or remorse.

The Librarian wrote:

If that would have been true which it isn't Harry would not have seen James and Sirius names so many times when cleaning the records. As Snape wanted to spite the boy of the man he hated. James and Sirius didn't went unpunished. But their punishment stayed in school as their actions was when they where children and in school.

When I said that James and Sirius weren't punished, I meant specifically for their bullying behaviour. It seems that James and Sirius were punished for minor misdemeanours (e.g. schoolboy pranks) but nobody seems to have reprimanded them for bullying.

The Librarian wrote:

Because of his flaws? o___0No. Snape gets punished due to his actions.And every action has a consequence.

In this context, I used the word 'flaws' interchangeably with 'bad actions'.

Last edited by Samovila on April 30th, 2012, 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Samovila wrote:I don't believe that Snape entirely shared Voldemort's views, regarding 'ethnic cleansing', and he may have privately felt some revulsion at the Death Eaters methods.

Based on what?

It was nighttime. Lily, who was wearing a dressing gown, stood with her arms folded in front of the portrait of the Fat Lady, at the entrance to Gryffindor Tower.

â€œI only came out because Mary told me you were threatening to sleep here.â€

â€œI was. I would have done. I never meant to call you Mudblood, it just - â€

â€œSlipped out?â€ There was no pity in Lilyâ€™s voice. â€œItâ€™s too late. Iâ€™ve made excuses for you for years. None of my friends can understand why I even talk to you. You and your precious little Death Eater friends - you see, you donâ€™t even deny it! You donâ€™t even deny thatâ€™s what youâ€™re all aiming to be! You canâ€™t wait to join You-Know-Who, can you?â€

â€œ - to call me Mudblood? But you call everyone of my birth Mudblood, Severus. Why should I be any different?â€

Snape has his views just as he is selfish, clodhearted, mean and obsessed with dark and dangerous arts.

Samovila wrote:However, this doesn't change the fact that Snape's actions, in supporting this heinous movement, were Machiavellian, opportunistic, deeply immoral and selfish. Snape evidently isn't a psychopath (like Voldemort, Bellatrix etc) but in some ways, he is less prinicipled because they at least believed in their evil cause.

You are right that it don't change it. But I think that there is more to it. I believe that Snape did share many of the views Voldemort had. His actions and words suggest it.

Samovila wrote:I doubt that Snape was directly involved in the killing of innocent people, but he was prepared to put innocent lives at risk while he walked away and reaped the benefits of being a Death Eater.

You don't get Voldemort's favor by just standing idly by and watching.I suspect that he do have blood on his hands.

Samovila wrote:I'm not justifying Snape's actions, but I do think he felt genuine remorse and strived to make reparation for his past actions.

Remorse? If he did he would have been better. But he bullied little and innocent children. You don't do that if you have remorse. Not unless he actually is a psychopath.

Samovila wrote:When I said that James and Sirius weren't punished, I meant specifically for their bullying behaviour. It seems that James and Sirius were punished for minor misdemeanours (e.g. schoolboy pranks) but nobody seems to have reprimanded them for bullying.

They where punished for both as long as they got caught. It's not like the teacher would do nothing if they ever walked on James, Sirius or any one else bullying another one.

Samovila wrote:In this context, I used the word 'flaws' interchangeably with 'bad act

Ohh. I see ^_^

I ship canon because I have actually read the books and seen what they feel and whom they love.

Ok if it's a question of which is my favourite character out of the two then it would be Sirius.

But as for whose side I'd be on in their fued...

Neither.
Both needed to get over their issues. They were grown men, not school children.
I don't condone how Sirius treated Snape throughout their Hogwarts years but I always hated Snape's personality.
And neither of them seemed to have matured from that point as they grew older.

I personally would be on Severus' side just because Snape was basically like a father figure for Harry Potter and he fought on both sides but he was a good character.

I like Sirius, but he was more of like a friend to Harry, however, Sirius is pretty awesome as well, but I would go for Severus. Snape is a misunderstood characters as many people on here probably know, but he really did protect Harry and he was nice but he had that dark personality inside because he was stuck helping two different people at the same time, and going behind each other's backs.

bellatrixL1 wrote:I personally would be on Severus' side just because Snape was basically like a father figure for Harry Potter and he fought on both sides but he was a good character.

Content Removed

Snape was never, ever and never would be anything that even was close to be a father figure to Harry. Snape started to bully and go after Harry the very first time they met with no remorse. Harry do NOT like Snape one bit. Snape do not like Harry one bit.

To end this to the point where you can't over see the facts, I'm going to let J.K end this.

Greta, 8: If Snape didn't love Lily, would he have still tried to protect Harry?

JKR:No. He Definitely wouldn't have done. He wouldn't have been remotely interested in what happened to this boy.